King County TV now has the video of Monday's Council hearing that approved forced mail-voting. The link is here (If it doesn't work in your browser, open it directly in Real Player) The discussion of vote-by-mail begins at 26:49.
If you only have the time to watch a few minutes of the video, I suggest the following two segments --
Kathy Lambert's striking amendment calling for a vote of the citizens to approve the shift to vote-by-mail, starting at 30:55. The fact that a majority of voters are currently voting by mail does not in any way imply that a majority of voters would wish to deny their neighbors or themselves a choice in this matter for future elections. Oregon's move to mandatory mail voting was instituted only after it was approved by a statewide ballot measure. Be sure to watch the show of hands at 36:14 All 4 Republicans voted to let the citizens decide the issue. All 5 Democrats refused to give the citizens the ultimate say in this decision.
The second bit to watch is Kathy Lambert's amendment to forbid ballots from being forwarded to voters who have moved (starting at 55:00). This amendment also failed in a strict party-line vote. The most appalling statement for loosening standards came from Larry Gossett at 1:11:04
I like for people to be able to vote and for us to do as much as we possibly can to assure that ... because a lot of times, poor people, people with different languages don't understand all our rules, they may move to a forwarding address but still live in the neighborhood or people might not understand what it is they're supposed to do in terms of letting the voting population, I mean the voting office, know that they're moving or going to be elsewhere. I still want to make it as easy as possible for them to vote. And I think this amendment has the potential of making it a little more difficult.Gossett expressed no concern whatsoever about the potential of people voting ballots (whether innocently or maliciously) that were valid at their previous residence but not at their current residence. Think about it this way: If someone moves and innocently votes in the wrong district they are both disenfranchising the voters in their old district and disenfranchising themselves by not voting in the correct district. The better solution to this problem would be for the post office to return the undeliverable ballot to the county along with the forwarding address and then for the county to mail a "please update your address" notice to the relocated voter. Unfortunately, the Democrats are too eager to slam through the mail-only package, accuracy be damned, that they didn't take the time to consider what is in the interests of the actual voters. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 21, 2006 01:28 PM | Email This
But Julia Patterson keeps stating that this isn't a partisan action by the Democrats, but that it's really talk radio and certain "unnamed" bloggers who are the problem. Patterson leads through such intellect, how could she be wrong?
For all the good it did in this tyranny of Democrat control, everyone should drop Kathy Lambert a note and tell her that her efforts did not go unnoticed or unappreciated.
Posted by: MJC on June 21, 2006 01:58 PMThere will come a day when all of the current politicians who grew up and entered office before the media shift will die off, fail to be re-elected, or retire. That's going to be a great day because the newer generation will come to expect public input and scrutiny. You know, that pesky little process called democracy.
Until then, we can expect Patterson's hauteur to continue.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 21, 2006 02:10 PMPersonally I think it is better that we do not scrape around for everyone to try and get them to vote. If they are too lazy to to lift a finger to vote they surely will not lift a finger to be informed. I do not want uninformed people to vote just to bring up the participation.
If only informed people voted, I think there would be more accountability to the voter
Posted by: Fred on June 21, 2006 02:47 PMI guess that my call into Constantine's office fell on deaf ears. Those of you in the south end should deluge Patterson's office with discontent.
Posted by: GOPolitics on June 21, 2006 03:08 PM
Folks who are informed will vote. I don't want folks who aren't informed to vote, and they won't.
For all the whining about how tough it is to vote and do things correctly, it doesn't actually require a lot of effort.
Posted by: South County on June 21, 2006 03:22 PMThe downside is that the DemoRats took the "Holier than thou" attitude. The upside is people are finally getting an opportunity to see was arrogant jerks they are. The blogs and other alternative media is going to make sure that there is a "toxic environment" around the King County elections department until the mess is fixed. The MSM seems to forget is was a few "they aren't important" types who eventually caused England to say goodbye to the lucrative tax revenues in the colony. Hmmm, King George had the same attitude as the council demoRats.
Posted by: Burdabee on June 21, 2006 04:08 PMPerhaps instead of spinning paranoid fantasies you could join the dialogue on making absentee/mail voting better and more secure. Pointing out deficiencies is one thing, offering solutions is another.
Posted by: Giffy on June 21, 2006 06:45 PMI live in one of the Other Counties (34) that did the same thing that KC did. We didnt' get to VOTE on the CHOICE. So Just Because The Other counties DO it, doesn't make it RIGHT.....
I thought the Democrats where all for CHOICES, well they robbed me of my right to VOTE at a polling place. How about all the POOR that can't afford the STAMPS, what are they to do? Hell according to Gossett, they are all confused, poor, and can't read even english....
So all I can say to you Giffy, "Watch what you Wish for".....
OH BTW, I hear the Democrats are a bit pissy about Mr. Kerry???? There is some bickering amoung the ranks ehhhh?
Junk mail is sent with a much greater frequency than absentee ballots, and much of it is addressed to "Occupant", so it is delivered to an address, not a person.
Most of the credit card solicitations and suchlike are generated from queries of the credit bureaus' databases. As soon as you update your address for one of your existing accounts, the junk mail will start arriving at your new address.
The difference between the absentee ballot and the junk mail catching up with you is that the elections department doesn't mail you a monthly statement.
Under the current system, where the absentee ballots are forwarded, the elections department has no way of knowing that you have moved.
That's why Stefan suggested that the process be changed to prohibit forwarding of absentee ballots. When the ballot is returned to the elections department, along with the forwarding address, the elections department can mail out a request for the voter to update their registration.
Posted by: ewaggin on June 21, 2006 09:15 PMDo you or anyone else (Stefan?) know if there is anything wrong (unconstitutional, unethical,etc.) for the state use the same means that the credit card companies do to find someones current address? Or maybe the good old USPS could be asked to forward change of address information to the voter database. It seems like it could be done easily and automatically (and therefore cheaply?) and would be a true public service. The people in charge of the state wide voter database could send out a letter to the voter to confirm the new address. Perhaps this would be more effective than spending money on a voter educational campaign.
Posted by: Juli Pettingill on June 21, 2006 10:22 PMAre you for real?
A very intelligent and hard working person, who moved about 5 blocks from where he used to live and didn't bother to update his voter registration while still listed with his old address, and you want the system to correct his status?
You say "Does it have to be up to the voter? Some people are just terrible with administriva."
A very intelligent and hard working person should care enough to re-register where he belongs.
Juli, you want a mommie state, and that is what your liberal democrat socialist buddie Ron Sims intends to give you. One fine day you could find yourself required to carry a pass to go shopping outside of your god-damned neighborhood just like they did in the Soviet. They were sure to tell everyone where to vote and when, and about the one candidate to elect.
Wise up.
Amazing.
1. Different School District
2. Different Sewer District
3. Different Drainage District
4. Soon to be different CITY!
Yes... any move of ANY distance should requuire reregistration.
Posted by: Right Wing Wacko on June 21, 2006 11:09 PMSorry, instinct whenever accomodations to a stupid system become necessary. I didn't jump to conclusions, I asked you a question and you answered it.
The fact that the person you know is able to vote using the wrong address is another of the many reasons why I simply throw up my hands (as the liberals like) and say . . . I don't know. I doubt that anyone can answer your question in a satisfactory way either. An all mail voting (ABL) system can only rely on a central database and that base can be manipulated at will.
If you want "fair" elections (i.e reflecting the will of the legal and alive electorate times one) ABL is truly unworkable, and the question you ask is one of the many, many, reasons why.
I prefer to "problem solve" as well. The solution is to vote out liberals in mass numbers despite the fact that they rig the elections.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on June 21, 2006 11:59 PMWe'll be watching ole Dean's voting habits after taking up "OFFICIAL" residence in Los(t) Angeles!
Posted by: GS on June 22, 2006 12:54 AMI have also been trying to keep informed on national news on election reform. I think that the problem we have resides in elected officials who have custody of the election systems, whether Democrat or Republican. These are the people who ignore problems or promote problems we have with our elections. In King County, the elected officials happen to be Democrats but state-wide, our elected official is a Republican (Sam Reed).
We have a nation-wide problem with our elections. I think people who are for election integrity, regardless of party affiliation, need to band together (on this one issue) to fight the people who are NOT for election integrity.
Posted by: Juli Pettingill on June 22, 2006 06:55 AM
You don't get to vote on everything. Remember the old republic vs democracy lessons from high school. If you really don’t like VBM, vote for candidates who oppose it. Hell if you really, really don’t like it start and imitative to require polls or to band absentee voting statewide. I bet ya Tim ‘Vader’ Eyman would help.
As for Kerry, many of us never liked him. He's dull, long spoken, and painfully bad at politics. But in a two person contest, that’s sometimes what you get. I know many republicans who think Bush is not the greatest, but still supported him vs Kerry. The Democrats biggest problem right now is not issues, the public generally supports us on those, but politics. We fail at communicating our ideas and more importantly our values to the public. We also fail at the game of politics. Kerry is a good example of that.
RE Katomar,
It's one thing to say it, its another to join the process to make it happen. VBM is now a pretty much done deal. Let’s see some IDEAS on how to make it better. In this last instance the R’s could have gotten some concessions out of the Dems on this had they not refused to work with them.
RE; Alphabet Soup,
Coming from you I'll take that as a compliment.
A late response... I did not mean to say that you were fixating on increasing the voting percentage, it was meant to be more of a generic response to your post. It is just that is always the reason given on why every security measure to insure election integrity is discarded using that excuse.
You are absolutely correct in saying that everyone should force the cretins (my word) to do as the people want. But the vote of the council shows a very partisan divide, even though, from the Ds on this site, this is not a partisan issue.
Posted by: Fred on June 22, 2006 08:10 AMI agree the vote of the council shows a partisan divide. It is of great concern to me and a bunch of other Dems.
I am not so sure VBM in this county is a done deal. I would prefer an all out effort from folks at this site to continue to fight it. One thing that I would recommend would be to educate R's in this area about voting integrity issues with emphasis on cleaning up problematic R's (on election integrity issues)like Sam Reed. I think that the Dems that are for election integrity need to keep working on elected official Dems and party Dems but we need your help.
What I don't want is for people's concerns at this site to be easily dismissed. I would ask people at this site who like to spout off about people like Patterson and Sims to CONSIDER toning it down so as not to give them reason to dismiss you. I ask this with some reservation as I think that people need to have some place where they can vent, but I wondering if this MIGHT be hurting the cause.
I think having more poll voters would help because the elected officials keep pointing out that the majority of voters are absentee. If you are a permanent absentee balloter please consider changing back to being a poll voter and urging others to do the same.
Posted by: Juli Pettingill on June 22, 2006 09:04 AM"The Democrats biggest problem right now is not issues, the public generally supports us on those, but politics."
You have it exactly upside-down. Everything for Dhimmicrats is politics. For Dhimmicrats it is their religion. The problem is, you have no issues! The closest to an "issue" the Dhimmicrats have shown is "Bush is bad. Bushitler sucks! I hate Bush!" Way to go, Dhimmicrats!
"We fail at communicating our ideas and more importantly our values to the public."
I would agree, but not the in way you suggest. The Dhimmicrat "message" just doesn't resonate with "the public".
"We also fail at the game of politics. "
That's an interesting concession giffy. Again, I agree, but for differing reasons. "Doing the same thing over and over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity". Once upon a time the liberals had a lock on the presentation of politics. They were free to spout whatever nonsense they felt like, and never was heard a discouraging word (because conservatives were held at bay from the cameras and microphones). That is no longer true. Conservatives have broken the grip on the MSM, and effectively spread their messages via the blogosphere. As a matter of fact, you are here in a feeble attempt to counter the spread of that message (BTW: it ain't working!)
VBM is just another pathetic attempt to thwart the will of the people and keep a rein on power. The council proceedings and ultimate vote was a slap in the face of every citizen of King County (actually the entire state, because of the message it sends). It ain't over 'til it's over!
Posted by: alphabet soup on June 22, 2006 09:12 AMEventually as the smarter Democrats pick up on the fact that their party is run by lunatics who sell the notions that cowardice is a cogent foreign policy, governments make economies, and cars make weather, they are turning away. Giffy is just lazy and liberalism works for him because it requires nothing but blind faith in inane nonsense.
His comments are fun to read though.
Amusing in a very low-brow (Al Gore, John Kerry) sort of way. Duh
Good Post. I've been thinking the same thing. The partisan nature of this issue, here in King County, really hurts our ability as citizens to have really meaninful discussions about the solutions.
And I for one, think that there is a tremendous chance here for left and right to agree, as citizens, and demand a fair solution.
What we need is a clear statement of goals. I've always gone with:
1. VVPB (Voter-Verified Paper Ballots)
2. Precinct Level Hand Counts
3. Publicly Owned Open-Source Software
4. And in King County, I still support an elected auditor.
We could have all of this overnight if we didn't have:
1. A Democratically controlled County Government that stands opposed.
2. A State House and Senate that do nothing to address voting reform.
3. A County Executive that stands opposed.
4. A Republican Secretary of State that stands opposed.
But the real hope here, is that it's not about D's and R's, it's about the right solution. The problem is that instead of talking about the solutions, we talk about the problems. Vote by Mail, Dean Logan, Ron Sims, the Council... these are also problems, and not solutions.
Until we, the People, can agree on the solution... the politicians will be bound and determined to steer the ship in a very partisan, rather than democratic, fashion.
Regards,
Gentry Lange